Articles | Volume 23, issue 10
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4323-2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4323-2019
Technical note
 | 
25 Oct 2019
Technical note |  | 25 Oct 2019

Technical note: Inherent benchmark or not? Comparing Nash–Sutcliffe and Kling–Gupta efficiency scores

Wouter J. M. Knoben, Jim E. Freer, and Ross A. Woods

Related authors

FROSTBYTE: A reproducible data-driven workflow for probabilistic seasonal streamflow forecasting in snow-fed river basins across North America
Louise Arnal, Martyn P. Clark, Alain Pietroniro, Vincent Vionnet, David R. Casson, Paul H. Whitfield, Vincent Fortin, Andrew W. Wood, Wouter J. M. Knoben, Brandi W. Newton, and Colleen Walford
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-3040,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-3040, 2024
Short summary
OpenWQ v.1: A multi-chemistry modelling framework to enable flexible, transparent, interoperable, and reproducible water quality simulations in existing hydro-models
Diogo Costa, Kyle Klenk, Wouter Knoben, Andrew Ireson, Raymond J. Spiteri, and Martyn Clark
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2787,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2787, 2023
Short summary
When ancient numerical demons meet physics-informed machine learning: adjoint-based gradients for implicit differentiable modeling
Yalan Song, Wouter J. M. Knoben, Martyn P. Clark, Dapeng Feng, Kathryn E. Lawson, and Chaopeng Shen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-258,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-258, 2023
Revised manuscript under review for HESS
Short summary
Modular Assessment of Rainfall–Runoff Models Toolbox (MARRMoT) v2.1: an object-oriented implementation of 47 established hydrological models for improved speed and readability
Luca Trotter, Wouter J. M. Knoben, Keirnan J. A. Fowler, Margarita Saft, and Murray C. Peel
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6359–6369, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6359-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6359-2022, 2022
Short summary
Teaching hydrological modelling: illustrating model structure uncertainty with a ready-to-use computational exercise
Wouter J. M. Knoben and Diana Spieler
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 3299–3314, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3299-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3299-2022, 2022
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Catchment hydrology | Techniques and Approaches: Modelling approaches
Impacts of spatiotemporal resolutions of precipitation on flood event simulation based on multimodel structures – a case study over the Xiang River basin in China
Qian Zhu, Xiaodong Qin, Dongyang Zhou, Tiantian Yang, and Xinyi Song
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1665–1686, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1665-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1665-2024, 2024
Short summary
A network approach for multiscale catchment classification using traits
Fabio Ciulla and Charuleka Varadharajan
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1617–1651, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1617-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1617-2024, 2024
Short summary
Multi-model approach in a variable spatial framework for streamflow simulation
Cyril Thébault, Charles Perrin, Vazken Andréassian, Guillaume Thirel, Sébastien Legrand, and Olivier Delaigue
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1539–1566, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1539-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1539-2024, 2024
Short summary
Advancing understanding of lake–watershed hydrology: a fully coupled numerical model illustrated by Qinghai Lake
Lele Shu, Xiaodong Li, Yan Chang, Xianhong Meng, Hao Chen, Yuan Qi, Hongwei Wang, Zhaoguo Li, and Shihua Lyu
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1477–1491, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1477-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1477-2024, 2024
Short summary
Technical note: Testing the connection between hillslope-scale runoff fluctuations and streamflow hydrographs at the outlet of large river basins
Ricardo Mantilla, Morgan Fonley, and Nicolás Velásquez
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1373–1382, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1373-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1373-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Abramowitz, G.: Towards a public, standardized, diagnostic benchmarking system for land surface models, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 819–827, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-819-2012, 2012. 
Addor, N., Newman, A. J., Mizukami, N., and Clark, M. P.: The CAMELS data set: catchment attributes and meteorology for large-sample studies, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 5293–5313, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5293-2017, 2017a. 
Addor, N., Newman, A. J., Mizukami, N., and Clark, M. P.: The CAMELS data set: catchment attributes and meteorology for large-sample studies. version 2.0., UCAR/NCAR, Boulder, CO, USA, https://doi.org/10.5065/D6G73C3Q, 2017b. 
Andersson, J. C. M., Arheimer, B., Traoré, F., Gustafsson, D., and Ali, A.: Process refinements improve a hydrological model concept applied to the Niger River basin, Hydrol. Process., 31, 4540–4554, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.11376, 2017. 
Beven, K. J., Younger, P. M., and Freer, J.: Struggling with Epistemic Uncertainties in Environmental Modelling of Natural Hazards, in: Second International Conference on Vulnerability and Risk Analysis and Management (ICVRAM) and the Sixth International Symposium on Uncertainty, Modeling, and Analysis (ISUMA), 13–16 July 2014, Liverpool, UK, American Society of Civil Engineers, 13–22, 2014. 
Download
Short summary
The accuracy of model simulations can be quantified with so-called efficiency metrics. The Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) has been often used in hydrology, but recently the Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) is gaining in popularity. We show that lessons learned about which NSE scores are acceptable do not necessarily translate well into understanding of the KGE metric.